J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2020; 81(04): 310-317
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1709165
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Olfaction in Olfactory Groove Meningiomas

Michaela Dedeciusova
1   Department of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
,
Norbert Svoboda
1   Department of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
,
Vladimir Benes
1   Department of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
,
Jaromir Astl
2   Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
,
David Netuka
1   Department of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

20 April 2019

30 July 2019

Publication Date:
03 May 2020 (online)

Abstract

Background Clinical examination, including pre- and postoperative assessment of olfaction, is essential in evaluating surgical outcomes in patients with olfactory groove meningiomas (OGMs). A review of a recent series revealed a lack of assessment of olfaction in most of the studies. Tests determining olfactory detection should be used to reveal olfactory dysfunction. Specialized examination techniques (e.g., electro-olfactography, olfactory evoked potentials, and functional magnetic resonance imaging) are currently used in research.

Methods Prospective analysis of 13 patients who underwent surgical resection of OGMs from December 2013 to December 2017 was performed. Data on clinical presentation, pre- and postoperative neurologic examinations, complications, recurrences, adjuvant treatment, and follow-up outpatient examinations were recorded. Olfactory function was assessed using the Sniffin' Sticks odor identification test preoperatively, postoperatively, and 1 year after surgery.

Results All the meningiomas were resected via unilateral craniotomy, and gross total resection was achieved in all cases. Surgery-related permanent morbidity was 7.7% and overall mortality 0%. For the eight patients with preoperative normosmia, five remained normosmic (62.5%), one deteriorated to hyposmia (12.5%), and two deteriorated to anosmia (25%). For the two patients with preoperative hyposmia, one remained hyposmic and one deteriorated to anosmia. For the three anosmic patients, two remained anosmic, and one improved to hyposmia.

The intact olfactory function preoperatively was associated with a better olfactory outcome. Overall, 62.5% of these patients remained normosmic, and none of the hyposmic or anosmic patients normalized their olfaction.

Higher meningioma volume is associated with worse olfactory function before surgery (normosmia in 16.7% versus 100.0% in less voluminous) and following the surgery (normosmia in 16.7% versus 57.1% less voluminous).

The unilateral surgical approach enabled the anatomical preservation of the contralateral olfactory nerve in 76.9% of our patients. Functional normosmia was achieved in 50% and hyposmia in 30% of these cases.

Conclusions Assessment of olfactory function is both vital in preoperative decision making (surgical approach, radicality of resection) and when evaluating surgical outcome. Preoperative normosmia seems to be the most important prognostic factor for functional olfactory outcome. In normosmic patients the olfaction was preserved in 62.5% of cases. Moreover, higher meningioma volume is associated with worse olfactory function before and following the surgery. The greatest advantage of the unilateral surgical approach is anatomical preservation of the contralateral olfactory nerve with a satisfactory functional outcome. These results support a proactive approach, with early surgical resection using a unilateral approach even in cases with less voluminous OGMs that enables the preservation of olfactory function in a significant proportion of patients.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.


 
  • References

  • 1 Hentschel SJ, DeMonte F. Olfactory groove meningiomas. Neurosurg Focus 2003; 14 (06) e4
  • 2 Nakamura M, Struck M, Roser F, Vorkapic P, Samii M. Olfactory groove meningiomas: clinical outcome and recurrence rates after tumor removal through the frontolateral and bifrontal approach. Neurosurgery 2007; 60 (05) 844-852 ; discussion 844–852
  • 3 Bitter AD, Stavrinou LC, Ntoulias G. , et al. The role of the pterional approach in the surgical treatment of olfactory groove meningiomas: a 20-year experience. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2013; 74 (02) 97-102
  • 4 Romani R, Lehecka M, Gaal E. , et al. Lateral supraorbital approach applied to olfactory groove meningiomas: experience with 66 consecutive patients. Neurosurgery 2009; 65 (01) 39-52 ; discussion 52–53
  • 5 Durante F. Extirpation of an intracranial tumor [in Italian]. Arch Atti Soc Ial Chir 1886; 2: 252-255
  • 6 Cushing H, Eisenhardt L. The olfactory groove meningiomas with primary anosmia. In: Cushing H. , Eisenhardt, eds. Meningiomas. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas; 1938: 250-282
  • 7 Toller SV. Assessing the impact of anosmia: review of a questionnaire's findings. Chem Senses 1999; 24 (06) 705-712
  • 8 Gazzeri R, Galarza M, Gazzeri G. Giant olfactory groove meningioma: ophthalmological and cognitive outcome after bifrontal microsurgical approach. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2008; 150 (11) 1117-1125 ; discussion 1126
  • 9 Spektor S, Valarezo J, Fliss DM. , et al. Olfactory groove meningiomas from neurosurgical and ear, nose, and throat perspectives: approaches, techniques, and outcomes. Neurosurgery 2005; 57 (4, Suppl): 268-280 ; discussion 268–280
  • 10 Schaller C, Rohde V, Hassler W. Microsurgical removal of olfactory groove meningiomas via the pterional approach. Skull Base Surg 1994; 4 (04) 189-192
  • 11 Turazzi S, Cristofori L, Gambin R, Bricolo A. The pterional approach for the microsurgical removal of olfactory groove meningiomas. Neurosurgery 1999; 45 (04) 821-825 ; discussion 825–826
  • 12 Pallini R, Fernandez E, Lauretti L. , et al. Olfactory groove meningioma: report of 99 cases surgically treated at the Catholic University School of Medicine, Rome. World Neurosurg 2015; 83 (02) 219-231 .e1-e3
  • 13 Guduk M, Yener U, Sun HI. , et al. Pterional and unifrontal approach for the microsurgical resection of olfactory groove meningiomas: experience with a series of 61 consecutive patients. Turk Neurosurg 2017; 27 (05) 707-715
  • 14 Jang WY, Jung S, Jung TY, Moon KS, Kim IY. Preservation of olfaction in surgery of olfactory groove meningiomas. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2013; 115 (08) 1288-1292
  • 15 Doty RL. Office procedures for quantitative assessment of olfactory function. Am J Rhinol 2007; 21 (04) 460-473
  • 16 Doty RL. Olfaction. Annu Rev Psychol 2001; 52: 423-452
  • 17 Doty RL, Applebaum S, Zusho H, Settle RG. Sex differences in odor identification ability: a cross-cultural analysis. Neuropsychologia 1985; 23 (05) 667-672
  • 18 Doty RL, Shaman P, Kimmelman CP, Dann MS. University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test: a rapid quantitative olfactory function test for the clinic. Laryngoscope 1984; 94 (2 Pt 1): 176-178
  • 19 Doty RL, Reyes PF, Gregor T. Presence of both odor identification and detection deficits in Alzheimer's disease. Brain Res Bull 1987; 18 (05) 597-600
  • 20 Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD. , et al. The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol 2007; 114 (02) 97-109
  • 21 Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G. , et al. The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 2016; 131 (06) 803-820
  • 22 Simpson D. The recurrence of intracranial meningiomas after surgical treatment. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1957; 20 (01) 22-39
  • 23 Kobal G, Hummel T, Sekinger B, Barz S, Roscher S, Wolf S. “Sniffin' sticks”: screening of olfactory performance. Rhinology 1996; 34 (04) 222-226
  • 24 Hummel T, Sekinger B, Wolf SR, Pauli E, Kobal G. ‘Sniffin’ sticks': olfactory performance assessed by the combined testing of odor identification, odor discrimination and olfactory threshold. Chem Senses 1997; 22 (01) 39-52
  • 25 Hummel T, Kobal G, Gudziol H, Mackay-Sim A. Normative data for the “Sniffin' Sticks” including tests of odor identification, odor discrimination, and olfactory thresholds: an upgrade based on a group of more than 3,000 subjects. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2007; 264 (03) 237-243
  • 26 Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC. , et al. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol 1982; 5 (06) 649-655
  • 27 Youssef AS, Sampath R, Freeman JL, Mattingly JK, Ramakrishnan VR. Unilateral endonasal transcribriform approach with septal transposition for olfactory groove meningioma: can olfaction be preserved?. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2016; 158 (10) 1965-1972
  • 28 Bassiouni H, Asgari S, Stolke D. Olfactory groove meningiomas: functional outcome in a series treated microsurgically. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2007; 149 (02) 109-121 ; discussion 12
  • 29 Welge-Luessen A, Temmel A, Quint C, Moll B, Wolf S, Hummel T. Olfactory function in patients with olfactory groove meningioma. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2001; 70 (02) 218-221
  • 30 Ung TH, Yang A, Aref M, Folzenlogen Z, Ramakrishnan V, Youssef AS. Preservation of olfaction in anterior midline skull base meningiomas: a comprehensive approach. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2019; 161 (04) 729-735
  • 31 Passagia JG, Chirossel JP, Favre JJ. , et al. Surgical approaches to the anterior fossa, and preservation of olfaction. Adv Tech Stand Neurosurg 1999; 25: 195-241
  • 32 Cardali S, Romano A, Angileri FF. , et al. Microsurgical anatomic features of the olfactory nerve: relevance to olfaction preservation in the pterional approach. Neurosurgery 2005; 57 (1, Suppl): 17-21 ; discussion 17–21
  • 33 Boari N, Gagliardi F, Roberti F, Barzaghi LR, Caputy AJ, Mortini P. The trans-frontal-sinus subcranial approach for removal of large olfactory groove meningiomas: surgical technique and comparison to other approaches. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2013; 74 (03) 152-161
  • 34 Liu JK, Silva NA, Sevak IA, Eloy JA. Transbasal versus endoscopic endonasal versus combined approaches for olfactory groove meningiomas: importance of approach selection. Neurosurg Focus 2018; 44 (04) E8
  • 35 Ottenhausen M, Rumalla K, Alalade AF. , et al. Decision-making algorithm for minimally invasive approaches to anterior skull base meningiomas. Neurosurg Focus 2018; 44 (04) E7
  • 36 Mielke D, Mayfrank L, Psychogios MN, Rohde V. The anterior interhemispheric approach: a safe and effective approach to anterior skull base lesions. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2014; 156 (04) 689-696
  • 37 Obeid F, Al-Mefty O. Recurrence of olfactory groove meningiomas. Neurosurgery 2003; 53 (03) 534-542 ; discussion 542–543
  • 38 Abbassy M, Woodard TD, Sindwani R, Recinos PF. An overview of anterior skull base meningiomas and the endoscopic endonasal approach. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 2016; 49 (01) 141-152
  • 39 de Almeida JR, Snyderman CH, Gardner PA, Carrau RL, Vescan AD. Nasal morbidity following endoscopic skull base surgery: a prospective cohort study. Head Neck 2011; 33 (04) 547-551
  • 40 Koutourousiou M, Fernandez-Miranda JC, Wang EW, Snyderman CH, Gardner PA. Endoscopic endonasal surgery for olfactory groove meningiomas: outcomes and limitations in 50 patients. Neurosurg Focus 2014; 37 (04) E8
  • 41 Schroeder HW. Indications and limitations of the endoscopic endonasal approach for anterior cranial base meningiomas. World Neurosurg 2014; 82 (6, Suppl): S81-S85